Baseball Experimenting With Rule Changes in Indy Ball

[Second Base]

Here are some of the experiments being conducted on the Atlantic Coast League.  I'll throw in my own commentary too. 

Home plate umpire assisted in calling balls and strikes by a TrackMan radar tracking system. (YES!!!  Great idea.  Let the game be decided by players, not umps.)

 

No mound visits permitted by players or coaches other than for pitching changes or medical issues. (I'm good with this.  Meet and plan before the game, play during the game). 

 

Pitchers must face a minimum of three batters, or reach the end of an inning before they exit the game, unless the pitcher becomes injured. (I'm good with this as well.  I know it essentially minimizes lefty specialists, but really makes the moves more strategic in nature, and should speed up the game by several minutes). 

 

Increase the size of 1st, 2nd and 3rd base from 15 inches square to 18 inches square. (Really don't care about this.  What's the point?)

 

Require two infielders to be on each side of second base when a pitch is released (if not, the ball is dead and the umpire shall call a ball).  (A rule change isn't necessary.  Just bunt the ball down the line.  They're giving you the base.  If hitters start taking it, they'll stop shifting.)

 

Time between innings and pitching changes reduced from 2:05 to 1:45. (Sounds good to me.)

 

Distance from pitching rubber to home plate extended 24 inches, in the second half of the season only; with no change to mound height or shape. (This sounds like a really bad idea to me.  Awful actually.)

[mancini79]

2 minutes ago, Second Base said:

Require two infielders to be on each side of second base when a pitch is released (if not, the ball is dead and the umpire shall call a ball).  (A rule change isn't necessary.  Just bunt the ball down the line.  They're giving you the base.  If hitters start taking it, they'll stop shifting.)

So you would be happy if Trout bunted the ball every time he was at the plate? Trust me, teams will still shift because a bunted single is better than what he could actually do swinging the bat.

[nate]

So, banning the shift and mound visits is great IMO.  The size of the bases and moving the mound sound dumb to me.  Other two rules are fine, just to speed up the game, I get it.

[Jeremiah]

going through this list, it seems like many of the changes being proposed and tested are directed at pitching and defense. It seems too one-sided to me. One thing that never seems to be proposed or tested is making the batter stay in the box once he gets there. No stepping out between pitches to adjust everything. That would allow pitchers to work more quickly and keep the action moving for the fans.

The only changes there I like are the larger base (player safety) and the reduced time between innings.

[Jeremiah]

Yogi Berra used to say, “Hit ‘em where they ain’t”. Baseball players used to be taught to adjust their approach as the defense and pitching dictate. Maybe they aren’t taught that anymore? I would think people who hit professionally can dump a ball the other way as needed until the defense stops shifting. Or maybe they aren’t as skilled hitters as we think they are.

[Glen]

Didn't @Jeff Fletcher address the "bunt against the shift" idea and why it isn't done?

Anyway...ok with 1 and 2. 3 I would make a minimum of two batters, not three. 4 and 5 are ok. 6, WTF?

[Stradling]

I just posted my thoughts on FB about this, so I will just copy and paste it here:

Here is my thought on all of this.  We aren’t the demograph that they are targeting with these rule changes.  We are all die hard fans or else we wouldn’t waste our time on fan websites.  The game is slowing down to a crawl.  A ton of the excitement of the game is no longer considered smart baseball.  In the late 70’s and early 80’s games were 30-35 minutes shorter.  This hasn’t improved the game.  The games aren’t longer in time because of extra action.  They are longer because of inaction.  It is pitchers walking around the mounds, it is hitters stepping out of the batters box, it is a smaller strike zone.  It is more pitching changes.  We can all pretend, “oh that is just part of the game”, well it wasn’t and now it is.  Start by enforcing the strike zone, force the pitcher to catch the ball on the mound on the return throw from the catcher, especially if no one is on base, and do not let the hitter step out of the box.  I don’t agree with many of the proposed rule changes, hell I would much rather have a pitch clock than move the mound back.  One rule change I would be ok with and this will come with some flack, and that is doing something about all of the shifts.  I think it is as simple putting a chalk line behind second base at the cut of the outfield grass.  Two fielders on one side of the line and two fielders on the other side.  The only other thing I wished would happen is a change in beliefs.  When most of us die hard fans were growing up striking out was disgraceful.  Now it is perfectly normal to strike out 150 times in a season, which is about once a game.  Last year there were more strike outs than hits, which is just awful.  My belief is if you ban the shift you will see more bats hitting balls.  Those are my thoughts on it, sorry for the long post.

[ScottT]

Most of these changes are kinda silly and will have zero impact in appealing to a younger demographic.  

The most intriguing ones to me involve the pitching mound, the distance from the rubber to home plate, etc.  Those could have a big impact and would seemingly increase the amount of balls in play.    At the same time, they don't change the game drastically. 

I strongly oppose the three batter minimum, two infielders on each side of second base, pitching change limits.  They are arbitrary  changes with strange possible ramifications. 

What happens if a pitcher might be injured before three batters but ends up ok?  Does he have to go on the DL?  If not why wouldn't teams fake it?  Batters should adjust to the shift.  Baseball is a game of adjustments, right?  I can see roster move limitations.  Shuttling guys back and forth between AAA every other week should stop, but why not let teams do what they want with their roster on a daily basis?   I also saw a weird suggestion about having 13 pitchers and 13 hitters.  What about Ohtani, Walsh, etc?  Teams should be able to do what they want with 25 roster spots.  

You aren't going to turn 10 year old esports fanatics into diehard baseball fans without changing the game enough to alienate the current fans that are worth $11.5 billion now. 

[Second Base]

6 hours ago, Stradling said:

I just posted my thoughts on FB about this, so I will just copy and paste it here:

Here is my thought on all of this.  We aren’t the demograph that they are targeting with these rule changes.  We are all die hard fans or else we wouldn’t waste our time on fan websites.  The game is slowing down to a crawl.  A ton of the excitement of the game is no longer considered smart baseball.  In the late 70’s and early 80’s games were 30-35 minutes shorter.  This hasn’t improved the game.  The games aren’t longer in time because of extra action.  They are longer because of inaction.  It is pitchers walking around the mounds, it is hitters stepping out of the batters box, it is a smaller strike zone.  It is more pitching changes.  We can all pretend, “oh that is just part of the game”, well it wasn’t and now it is.  Start by enforcing the strike zone, force the pitcher to catch the ball on the mound on the return throw from the catcher, especially if no one is on base, and do not let the hitter step out of the box.  I don’t agree with many of the proposed rule changes, hell I would much rather have a pitch clock than move the mound back.  One rule change I would be ok with and this will come with some flack, and that is doing something about all of the shifts.  I think it is as simple putting a chalk line behind second base at the cut of the outfield grass.  Two fielders on one side of the line and two fielders on the other side.  The only other thing I wished would happen is a change in beliefs.  When most of us die hard fans were growing up striking out was disgraceful.  Now it is perfectly normal to strike out 150 times in a season, which is about once a game.  Last year there were more strike outs than hits, which is just awful.  My belief is if you ban the shift you will see more bats hitting balls.  Those are my thoughts on it, sorry for the long post.

I think that's at least part of it, definitely. Enforcing existent rules like keeping batters in the box and unwritten rules like pitchers catching the ball on the mound would speed up the game. But there are still slighter measures that would keep the game largely the same while speeding it up again. 

No mound visits unless your making a pitching change. This doesn't radically change the game. But it cuts down on a lot of the inactivity. Forcing pitchers to face at least three batters before being removed. Using 12 relievers on your roster just to play a situational matchup for the last 9 outs of the game has to add at least 10 minutes to each game, and this really cuts down on that. In fact, if anything, this forces ,Ana gets to be much more strategic in who they bring in for relief, or as a pinch hitter. It could even end up extending the innings starters are getting. This whole 4-5 innings nonsense is ridiculous. Cutting the time between innings by 20 seconds saves another six minutes per game.

By enacting these three simple rules, you cut gamtime down by 15+ minutes and still appease the purists. 

[Jeff Fletcher]

Banning the shift, IMO, will have almost no impact. So the SS will have to stand directly behind 2B instead of 15 feet on the other side. And when can he move? Can he move over when the pitcher is in his motion?

I don’t think the shift has hurt baseball. 

The biggest issues to me are too many strikeouts, too many pitching changes and too much standing around between pitches. Two of those can be corrected. I’m not sure what to do about the strikeouts. Pitchers are just getting too good.

Maybe expansion will help thin the pitching so there are less 98 mph throwers per team. And maybe limit the number of pitchers on a roster so there’s more emphasis on pitching to contact and being efficient, since you can’t use 5 pitchers in a game for 15 pitches each. 

[jessecrall]

3 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

The biggest issues to me are too many strikeouts, too many pitching changes and too much standing around between pitches. Two of those can be corrected. I’m not sure what to do about the strikeouts. Pitchers are just getting too good.

Maybe expansion will help thin the pitching so there are less 98 mph throwers per team. And maybe limit the number of pitchers on a roster so there’s more emphasis on pitching to contact and being efficient, since you can’t use 5 pitchers in a game for 15 pitches each. 

I'm with you on this, mainly because I want a diverse game; not just in terms of where players are from but HOW they play. Watching an endless parade of relievers throwing 98  to .240 power hitters is limiting the game. Baseball has already made adjustments to deal with imbalances via lowered mounds, altered strike zones, humidors, QuestTec...none of this is some grand violation of a pristine pastime.

[stormngt]

11 hours ago, mancini79 said:

So you would be happy if Trout bunted the ball every time he was at the plate? Trust me, teams will still shift because a bunted single is better than what he could actually do swinging the bat.

Trout would bunt into the shift?

Bunting is only an advantage for LH hitters. 

[stormngt]

10 hours ago, Stradling said:

I just posted my thoughts on FB about this, so I will just copy and paste it here:

Here is my thought on all of this.  We aren’t the demograph that they are targeting with these rule changes.  We are all die hard fans or else we wouldn’t waste our time on fan websites.  The game is slowing down to a crawl.  A ton of the excitement of the game is no longer considered smart baseball.  In the late 70’s and early 80’s games were 30-35 minutes shorter.  This hasn’t improved the game.  The games aren’t longer in time because of extra action.  They are longer because of inaction.  It is pitchers walking around the mounds, it is hitters stepping out of the batters box, it is a smaller strike zone.  It is more pitching changes.  We can all pretend, “oh that is just part of the game”, well it wasn’t and now it is.  Start by enforcing the strike zone, force the pitcher to catch the ball on the mound on the return throw from the catcher, especially if no one is on base, and do not let the hitter step out of the box.  I don’t agree with many of the proposed rule changes, hell I would much rather have a pitch clock than move the mound back.  One rule change I would be ok with and this will come with some flack, and that is doing something about all of the shifts.  I think it is as simple putting a chalk line behind second base at the cut of the outfield grass.  Two fielders on one side of the line and two fielders on the other side.  The only other thing I wished would happen is a change in beliefs.  When most of us die hard fans were growing up striking out was disgraceful.  Now it is perfectly normal to strike out 150 times in a season, which is about once a game.  Last year there were more strike outs than hits, which is just awful.  My belief is if you ban the shift you will see more bats hitting balls.  Those are my thoughts on it, sorry for the long post.

You guys do know ending the shift woukd extend Pujols career a couple more years.

[Stradling]

8 minutes ago, stormngt said:

You guys do know ending the shift woukd extend Pujols career a couple more years.

And?

[Lou]

11 hours ago, Second Base said:

Distance from pitching rubber to home plate extended 24 inches, in the second half of the season only; with no change to mound height or shape. (This sounds like a really bad idea to me.  Awful actually.)

this might be the most ridiculous rule change I've ever heard. not so much the moving the rubber, but to do it midway through the season is idiotic. I'm sure this won't lead to more injuries.

nitwits 

[Second Base]

18 minutes ago, Lou said:

this might be the most ridiculous rule change I've ever heard. not so much the moving the rubber, but to do it midway through the season is idiotic. I'm sure this won't lead to more injuries.

nitwits 

It puts pitchers in danger, it lacks consistency....

Plus, when you understand just how much velocity the ball loses in its travel toward the plate, you realize moving the mound two feet back effectively takes 5 mph off a fastball. And hitting a baseball being a game of reaction and adjustment measured literally in milliseconds, giving hitters that much extra time is an overcorrection and puts them at an advantage that cannot be compensated.

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

12 hours ago, Second Base said:

Require two infielders to be on each side of second base when a pitch is released (if not, the ball is dead and the umpire shall call a ball).  (A rule change isn't necessary.  Just bunt the ball down the line.  They're giving you the base.  If hitters start taking it, they'll stop shifting.)

About time to implement an illegal defense rule if you ask me. I'm good with this...

[Ace-Of-Diamonds]

1 hour ago, stormngt said:

You guys do know ending the shift woukd extend Pujols career a couple more years.

He is here already with 3 more years on his contract. If you think he will get another contract after that you're crazy.

[Angel Oracle]

Couldn’t it be said that the strikeouts have also grown due to batters being more concerned with the long ball today?

Record numbers of Ks and HRs

[Angel Oracle]

4 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

He is here already with 3 more years on his contract. If you think he will get another contract after that you're crazy.

I think he’s referring to being able to play at least two of those three remaining years on his contract, instead of needing to negotiate a pay out and retire now.

[Angel Oracle]

4 hours ago, Ace-Of-Diamonds said:

About time to implement an illegal defense rule if you ask me. I'm good with this...

The NBA has theirs.

[Angelsjunky]

I don't like the idea of prohibiting tactical moves like the shift or the lefty specialist. I don't enjoy watching an inning in which there are several pitching changes, but it is part of the tactical nature of the game. 

In my view, the "solution" to the shift is not to enforce rules but to teach hitters to spray the ball when necessary. In other words, defense has improved tactically, so now the offense has to try to find a way around it. That's how the game evolves. 

 

[mancini79]

13 hours ago, stormngt said:

Trout would bunt into the shift?

Bunting is only an advantage for LH hitters. 

Yeah, used the wrong player to make my point. Bottom line is that asking a star player to bunt as an "adjustment" against the shift is not good for MLB.

[AngelsLakersFan]

19 hours ago, Jeff Fletcher said:

Banning the shift, IMO, will have almost no impact. So the SS will have to stand directly behind 2B instead of 15 feet on the other side. And when can he move? Can he move over when the pitcher is in his motion?

I don’t think the shift has hurt baseball. 

The biggest issues to me are too many strikeouts, too many pitching changes and too much standing around between pitches. Two of those can be corrected. I’m not sure what to do about the strikeouts. Pitchers are just getting too good.

Maybe expansion will help thin the pitching so there are less 98 mph throwers per team. And maybe limit the number of pitchers on a roster so there’s more emphasis on pitching to contact and being efficient, since you can’t use 5 pitchers in a game for 15 pitches each. 

I agree with this 100%. I believe the stats have born out that the shift has actually had minimal impact on BABIP as well. 

The strikeouts actually play into the shift a bit. Hitters stopped caring about K's and are just selling out trying to crush balls as hard as they can. The byproduct is a lot of balls pulled on the ground, something that has led to the rise of the shift. So any limits on the shift actually reduce a hitters incentive to focus on contact. A shifted infield is actually an incentive to focus on contact over power and launch angle. 

The other big influence on the increase in K's is the increase in bullpen usage, and probably the number of healthy, post-tommy-john guys there are. Reducing the incentive to include relievers on the roster is how I would approach it. 

[notherhalo]

15 hours ago, Lou said:

this might be the most ridiculous rule change I've ever heard. not so much the moving the rubber, but to do it midway through the season is idiotic. I'm sure this won't lead to more injuries.

nitwits 

Is the idea perhaps to create something of an A/B test?